MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Trajectories in smoking habits and outcomes in patients with stable coronary artery disease

2024· article· en· W4403806846 on OpenAlexaff
Jules Mesnier, Louis Giovachini, Nicolas Danchin, Ian Ford, Michał Tendera, Laurent J. Feldman, Grégory Ducrocq, Roberto Ferrari, Jean‐Claude Tardif, Kim Fox, Philippe Gabríel Steg

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Disease and Adiposity
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoronary artery diseaseCardiologyInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Smoking is a well-identified risk factor for recurrent cardiovascular (CV) events in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD). However, smoking status is not binary, and there is a wide diversity of smoking habits trajectories within this population, with different consequences on residual CV risk. Purpose To better understand how smoking status evolves in patients with CAD, and how it is associated with subsequent CV events. Methods We analysed the CLARIFY registry, which included 32,378 patients with CAD. We defined groups according to smoking status at inclusion in the registry: never, former and active smokers. For former smokers, we assessed the timing of definitive smoking discontinuation and its relationship with subsequent CV events. For active smokers, we investigated the association between smoking reduction or discontinuation in active smokers with outcomes. Our primary endpoint was the occurrence of MACE defined by CV death or myocardial infarction (MI) during the 5-year follow-up period adjusted on known predictors for MACE in CAD patients. Results At inclusion, 13,366 (41.3%) patients had never smoked, 14,973 (46.2%) were former smokers, and 4,039 (12.5%) were current smokers, after an average of 6.5 (±6.3) years following CAD diagnosis. In former smokers that were smoking at the time of CAD diagnosis, 72.8% definitively discontinued smoking within the first year following diagnosis, while only 27.2% quit in subsequent years. Each additional year of active smoking after CAD diagnosis increased the risk of MACE (adjusted HR [aHR] 1.08, 95% CI 1.04-1.12 per year). However, regardless of the duration of smoking cessation, former smokers did not return to the cardiovascular risk levels observed in individuals who never smoked (figure). In active smokers at inclusion, smoking cessation was associated with improved CV outcomes, irrespective of the timing of cessation during follow-up (aHR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42-0.76, p < 0.001). Among active smokers, 25.7% reduced their quantity smoked within the first year of follow-up without quitting, but this did not significantly reduce the rate of CV death and MI (aHR 0.96, 95% CI 0.74-1.26, p = 0.78) compared to other active smokers. Conclusion In active smokers diagnosed with CAD, the vast majority of definite quitters cease smoking within the first year of CAD diagnosis. Each subsequent year of active smoking adversely affects CV outcomes. Smoking cessation at any time significantly reduces the risk of CV death or recurrent MI compared to persistent active smokers, although CV risk of former smokers does not decrease to the levels observed in never-smokers. Finally, smoking quantity reduction is not enough to reduce CV risk in this population. These findings underscore the critical importance of timely interventions for smokers diagnosed with CAD, and emphasize that when it comes to smoking cessation, sooner is better, but it is never too late.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicCardiovascular Disease and Adiposity→French-language works237,207→